Author: j...@google.com
Date: Tue Jun 23 22:55:33 2009
New Revision: 5621
Modified:
trunk/user/test/com/google/gwt/i18n/client/impl/CurrencyTest.java
Log:
Unbreak the build by fixing doubled content of the file from applying a
patch
having had the file lying around already.
Patch by: jat
Author: j...@google.com
Date: Tue Jun 23 20:13:51 2009
New Revision: 5620
Added:
trunk/user/test/com/google/gwt/i18n/client/impl/CurrencyTest.java
Modified:
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/client/impl/CurrencyData.java
On Jun 23, 2009, at 1:18 AM, Andrew Pietsch wrote:
Hi there,
Like many others I'm looking forward to see what you guys come up with
in the databinding area. But I miss some of the PresentationModel/
ValueModel style frameworks I've come to like in Swing and thought I'd
put in my 2c
Hello, I'm trying to run ant test and keep getting a variety of
errors. Specifically, many of the tests fail due to Out of Memory
errors, and I'm not sure how to get them to succeed. I have followed
all the documentation for building GWT, and that seems to have worked,
but I am unable to get
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Add features:
1) Assertion should be enabled by default for web mode testing.
2) Users need to use -da flag to force assertions back off.
The request came from Lex Spoon:
The idea of -da is that assertions would be disabled. It's possible
that some people will not
Hi ,
I am fairly new to GWT and my requirement needs a glasspanel to be
used. But due to the heavy size of incubator.jar file i would like to
just copy the GlassPanel class and GlassPanelImpl into my own
workspace and create a custom glasspanel . This would remove the
dependency on incubator.jar
Hi,
I am relatively new to GWT. My requirement is to use GlassPanel but my
hands are tied down because of the heavy size of incubator.jar file
which my deployment war file cannot afford. So the only option is to
use custom glasspanel.
So i copied down teh source code both GlassPanel.java and
ant test should do it. What platform and JVM are you using? Do even the
dev directory's tests fail? (cd dev; ant test will check that, so long
as you've built things like build-tools already.)
The memory limits for GWTTestCase tests (i.e. for user) are set in
trunk/common.ant.xml, currently at
Is there any other design criterion that people can see? The main
ones I see are that it's easy to implement and maintain, it's easy to
spec, and that developers can use it without needing any major code
refactor. That narrows it down to either an annotation on the method
(option 1), or an
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Lex Spoonsp...@google.com wrote:
It's the *call* of runAsync that the compiler pays direct attention
to, not its argument. That's why I am pushing back against approaches
that annotate some aspect of the argument.
I think the push-back is a really good idea.
On 2009/06/24 15:54:52, jlabanca wrote:
LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48801
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
On 2009/06/24 16:02:54, jlabanca wrote:
LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48802
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Here's another thought to please keep in mind during the transition
from the incubator to trunk...
I've got a subclass of AbstractColumnDefinition (call it
TheUsualColumnDefinition), which I use in most every place. It does
all the stuff I normally need, like setting the right kind of cell
Just curious if the effort has been resumed? Regardless, is there
anyway for you to commit what you do have somewhere we could look and
provide feedback?
thanks,
jay
On Jun 10, 8:28 am, John LaBanca jlaba...@google.com wrote:
@jay - I got side tracked with other tasks, but I'll pick up the
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Makes it go much faster
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48803
Affected files:
user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/AbstractLocalizableImplCreator.java
user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/ResourceFactory.java
LGTM after the change below.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48803/diff/1/3
File user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/ResourceFactory.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48803/diff/1/3#newcode183
Line 183: Resource resource = resourceMap.get(path);
I think this is going to
John's second point is perhaps most important: the size of your compile-time
classpath is irrelevent to your deployment. Once compiled, GWT spits out a
collection of javascript files and other resources (from your modules'
public resources, generated resource bundles, RPC serialization policy
Lots. Like, a whole lot. I had a measurement at one time but lost them. :(
Would take a while to remeasure.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
How much?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:45 PM, sco...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Makes it
I haven't looked at the code yet, but would be happy to do so if
Freeland's review is not enough.
I just want to say that I would vote for the -da flag to be longer and
more obscure, because the use case is important but not common. Perhaps
-XdisableAssertions?
I noticed that many of my ant tests started to run out of memory when
I switched to a new Linux install. I downloaded Sun's 32 bit jdk and
that helped.
-Eric.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Freeland Abbottfabb...@google.com wrote:
ant test should do it. What platform and JVM are you
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Ian Petersenispet...@gmail.com wrote:
The following should be allowed:
@SplitPointName(foo)
final AsyncCallback callback = chooseACallback();
if (flipACoin())
GWT.runAsync(callback);
else
GWT.runAsync(callback);
I don't see how to literally allow
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Lex Spoon sp...@google.com wrote:
Overall, unless I missed something, it's down to style and taste. I'd
pick 1, then 4, then 6. Ian has indicated preferring 6, then 4, then
1. I presume Cameron prefers 4 over anything else. Shall we go with
4, then,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Lex Spoonsp...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Ian Petersenispet...@gmail.com wrote:
The following should be allowed:
@SplitPointName(foo)
final AsyncCallback callback = chooseACallback();
if (flipACoin())
GWT.runAsync(callback);
Reviewers: jgw,
Description:
This patch adds the ability to insert arbitrary HTML at the current
caret position in a RichTextArea. The InsertHTML command is actually
widely supported on all browsers except IE. I used IEs doc.selection to
achieve the same effect.
If text is selected, it will
LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48804/diff/1/2
File
user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/impl/RichTextAreaImplIE6.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48804/diff/1/2#newcode79
Line 79: }
So I assume there's no InsertHTML command on IE6, right? Since you just
did all
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Scott Blum sco...@google.com wrote:
Lots. Like, a whole lot. I had a measurement at one time but lost them.
:( Would take a while to remeasure.
Sold.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Lex Spoonsp...@google.com wrote:
Overall, unless I missed something,
Okay, Bruce pointed out a new constraint to me: if different libraries
name their runAsync calls, then we want to able to refer to those
calls reliably even if different libraries choose the
I prefer 4 as well, because I think it will be less prone to error and it is
more directly associated with the runAsync call.
However, I'm curious, what is the effect of the following:
GWT.runAsync(foo, callback1);
GWT.runAsync(bar, callback1);
That would appear to me to generate identical code,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Ray Cromwellcromwell...@gmail.com wrote:
I prefer 4 as well, because I think it will be less prone to error and it is
more directly associated with the runAsync call.
However, I'm curious, what is the effect of the following:
GWT.runAsync(foo, callback1);
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Lex Spoon sp...@google.com wrote:
Thoughts? The main downside I know of is the one John Tamplin has
pointed out: if there are multiple runAsync calls within a single
class -- as sometimes happens -- then the programmer has to code up
some new classes that
Author: sco...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 10:53:23 2009
New Revision: 5629
Modified:
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/AbstractLocalizableImplCreator.java
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/ResourceFactory.java
Log:
Make i18n use ResourceOracle to improve speed.
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 11:59:19 2009
New Revision: 5630
Modified:
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RichTextArea.java
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/impl/RichTextAreaImplStandard.java
Log:
Adds full justification, undo, and redo options
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ray Cromwellcromwell...@gmail.com wrote:
However, I'm curious, what is the effect of the following:
GWT.runAsync(foo, callback1);
GWT.runAsync(bar, callback1);
That would appear to me to generate identical code, but with two different
named output files.
I
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Lex Spoonsp...@google.com wrote:
Thoughts? The main downside I know of is the one John Tamplin has
pointed out: if there are multiple runAsync calls within a single
class -- as sometimes happens -- then the programmer has to code up
some new classes that will
Author: j...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 07:41:33 2009
New Revision: 5624
Modified:
releases/1.6/user/test/com/google/gwt/dom/client/ElementTest.java
Log:
Merging trunk r5492 into releases/1.6
Modified: releases/1.6/user/test/com/google/gwt/dom/client/ElementTest.java
Each of these different libraries would be enclosed within a unique GWT
module therefore when you refer to the split point name, can't you just use
the module name + split point name ?
in module ThirdParty :
GWT.runAsync(one, new RunAsyncCallback() { ... });
in MyModule :
GWT.runAsync(one, new
I think that may be some of the problem. I'm using 64-bit linux.
I'll try switching to the 32-bit JDK and upping the memory limit.
Thanks,
Ben
On Jun 24, 11:11 am, Eric Ayers zun...@google.com wrote:
I noticed that many of my ant tests started to run out of memory when
I switched to a new
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 14:32:41 2009
New Revision: 5631
Modified:
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RichTextArea.java
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/impl/RichTextAreaImplIE6.java
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Ben Chambers bjchamb...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that may be some of the problem. I'm using 64-bit linux.
I'll try switching to the 32-bit JDK and upping the memory limit.
GWT tests require legacy hosted mode, which requires a 32-bit JVM
currently. You
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 10:15:17 2009
New Revision: 5628
Added:
trunk/eclipse/reference/code-museum/SingleIssue.launch
trunk/eclipse/reference/code-museum/war/
trunk/eclipse/reference/code-museum/war/DefaultMuseum.html (contents,
props changed)
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 10:09:30 2009
New Revision: 5627
Modified:
trunk/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RadioButton.java
Log:
Fixed a bug introduced in r5553 where RadioButton would sink ONMOUSEOUT
instead of ONMOUSEUP.
Patch by: jlabanca
Review by: jgw
Author: j...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 07:58:38 2009
New Revision: 5626
Modified:
releases/1.6/branch-info.txt
Log:
Updating branch-info.
Modified: releases/1.6/branch-info.txt
==
---
Author: j...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 05:26:07 2009
New Revision: 5622
Added:
releases/1.6/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsBreakUpLargeVarStatements.java
- copied, changed from r5459,
/trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsBreakUpLargeVarStatements.java
Four additional arguments in favor of using split point moniker classes is
that they
1) are easier to find within an IDE (i.e. Show References in your IDE from
a moniker class declaration would show you the associated runAsync call),
2) can take advantage of inheritance as a way to group split
Author: j...@google.com
Date: Wed Jun 24 07:57:28 2009
New Revision: 5625
Modified:
releases/1.6/user/super/com/google/gwt/emul/java/sql/Date.java
releases/1.6/user/test/com/google/gwt/emultest/java/sql/SqlDateTest.java
Log:
Merging trunk c5616 into releases/1.6
Modified:
All good points.
Would interfaces be supported as well ?
Are there any dangers of allowing arbitrary classes (or interfaces) to be
used as monikers ?
i.e from your example, would there be anything wrong with using
EmailCompositionView.class as the moniker ?
void onComposeButtonClicked() {
Would it be better to post this to the GWT Discussion Group? You'll
get a lot more feedback there. You can find the group here:
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit
--
Arthur Kalmenson
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Elad and Osnatosnat.no...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is a link to
I guess the compiler would have to verify that each call to runAsync uses a
unique moniker - is there anything else ?
I think that's it. Pretty easy to check, and pretty easy for a developer to
reason about, too.
Must the moniker class exists in your own module ?
I don't think it ought to
For what it's worth, I like the moniker class idea best. Staying type
safe, IMHO, is always a good thing.
With regards to the downside John Tamplin mentioned (multiple runAsync
calls in one class), why not consider that a feature? Since the
original idea of naming the runAsync call is to allow
49 matches
Mail list logo
